Save ARM

[bd139]

Looks like some folk aren’t happy about NVidia buying ARM:

https://savearm.co.uk/

Check who it is at the bottom.

[SerieZ]

Does not seem like unreasonable points he is making to me except for the one where he talks about the government bailing out that other Company.
I never understood how a supposedly Capitalist Society does such a thing.

[langwadt]

Does not seem like unreasonable points he is making to me except for the one where he talks about the government bailing out that other Company.
I never understood how a supposedly Capitalist Society does such a thing.

if it is critical to the country or makes financial sense it seems perfectly reasonable

[SerieZ]

Does not seem like unreasonable points he is making to me except for the one where he talks about the government bailing out that other Company.
I never understood how a supposedly Capitalist Society does such a thing.

if it is critical to the country or makes financial sense it seems perfectly reasonable

In my experience an organization once deemed infallible is bound to attract the worst kind of behavior. (Even more so than the ones that hold themselves already only accountable to the Government.)
That is not something I consider should be encouraged generally and especially not at a non life-crucial venture such as ARM.

Also what makes ARM more special than all the other Companies which globalized and shipped tons workplaces away?
 
Smells like selective Outrage to me.

[steviefaux]

It won't happen as they never stopped Japan buying it in the first place and Bojo doesn't care. The Tories said it was great for the UK, which made no sense because they were selling it off with no real return. I had shares in them then and were forced to sell to Softbank. I'm curious to know how much of a stake Hermann Hauser still has. You'd think if you wanted it to not change hands that bad, you'd have never sold your stake and kept enough to stop sales like this.

I don't begrudge him if he made money out of selling his stake and he is still allowed an opinion but if it was me, I'd at least explain what happened to the stake I'd had in the company even if it was to say "Yes, I was the founder and you could argue I shouldn't of let these sales happen, but I didn't have enough of a controlling stake or money to ever stop them." At least it would be honest.

[tooki]

Does not seem like unreasonable points he is making to me except for the one where he talks about the government bailing out that other Company.
I never understood how a supposedly Capitalist Society does such a thing.

if it is critical to the country or makes financial sense it seems perfectly reasonable

In my experience an organization once deemed infallible is bound to attract the worst kind of behavior. (Even more so than the ones that hold themselves already only accountable to the Government.)
That is not something I consider should be encouraged generally and especially not at a non life-crucial venture such as ARM.

Also what makes ARM more special than all the other Companies which globalized and shipped tons workplaces away?
 
Smells like selective Outrage to me.

ARM is a quasi-monopoly, in that all smartphones and nearly all tablets run on ARM chips, as do microcontrollers from practically every manufacturer, powering all manner of devices’ embedded controllers. It’s practically inevitable that some ARM processors power safety-critical equipment including life-support systems.

As such, I think there is merit to the argument that it’s a bad idea to have ARM’s technologies subject to US government export restrictions, especially while the US happens to have such petty, capricious, vindictive, and unprincipled leadership. That it would consider weaponizing export restrictions isn’t even speculative.

[SerieZ]

Does not seem like unreasonable points he is making to me except for the one where he talks about the government bailing out that other Company.
I never understood how a supposedly Capitalist Society does such a thing.

if it is critical to the country or makes financial sense it seems perfectly reasonable

In my experience an organization once deemed infallible is bound to attract the worst kind of behavior. (Even more so than the ones that hold themselves already only accountable to the Government.)
That is not something I consider should be encouraged generally and especially not at a non life-crucial venture such as ARM.

Also what makes ARM more special than all the other Companies which globalized and shipped tons workplaces away?
 
Smells like selective Outrage to me.

ARM is a quasi-monopoly, in that all smartphones and nearly all tablets run on ARM chips, as do microcontrollers from practically every manufacturer, powering all manner of devices’ embedded controllers. It’s practically inevitable that some ARM processors power safety-critical equipment including life-support systems.

As such, I think there is merit to the argument that it’s a bad idea to have ARM’s technologies subject to US government export restrictions, especially while the US happens to have such petty, capricious, vindictive, and unprincipled leadership. That it would consider weaponizing export restrictions isn’t even speculative.

So if the US were under a leadership more suiting to you then you would be fine with it or why do you mention it? Honestly to me it seems like your current President just lives rent free in your head on every single topic! 

You did however mention the topic that raises my skepticism over this -"quasi monopolies of an Organization" so prevalent in the certain tech industries, and that is a real Issue not limited to Arm, not better under British Government or any Government for that matter.